Dewitt v. USA

Filing 447

DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING INITIAL (DOC. #451) AND SUPPLEMENTAL (DOC. #453) REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE; DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO SAID JUDICIAL FILINGS (DOC. #452 AND #454) OVERRULED; DEFENDANT'S MOTION T O VACATE JUDGMENT, PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 59(e) (DOC. #449) OVERRULED; REQUEST TO REMOVE MAGISTRATE JUDGE OVERRULED; ANTICIPATED MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY AND FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS DENIED; TERMINATION ENTRY. Signed by Judge Walter H Rice on 09/20/11. (pb1)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION A T DAYTON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 3:98cr081
and 3:10cv153

vs.
KEITH W. DEWITT,

JUDGE WALTER HERBERT RICE
Defendant.

DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING INITIAL (DOC. #451) AND
SUPPLEMENTAL (DOC. #453) REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE; DEFENDANT'S
OBJECTIONS TO SAID JUDICIAL FILINGS (DOC. #452 AND #454)
OVERRULED; DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT,
PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 59(e) (DOC. #449) OVERRULED;
REQUEST TO REMOVE MAGISTRATE JUDGE OVERRULED;
ANTICIPATED MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY AND
FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS DENIED; TERMINATION
ENTRY

Pursuant to the reasoning and citations of authority set forth by the United
States Magistrate Judge, in his Initial (Doc. #451) and Supplemental (Doc. #453)
Reports and Recommendations, as well as upon a thorough de novo review of this
Court's file and the applicable law, said Reports and Recommendations are adopted
in their entirety.

The Defendant's Objections to said judicial filings (Doc. #452 and

#454) are overruled.

Judgment will be ordered entered in favor of the Government

and against Defendant herein, overruling Defendant's Motion to Vacate Judgment,

filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) (Doc. #449).
This Court denies Defendant's request to remove the Magistrate Judge from
any further proceedings in this case, given that the Defendant has given no legally
cognizable reasons for the action requested of this Court.
In ruling as aforesaid, the Court makes the following, non-exclusive,
observations:
1.

As an aside, prior to sentencing in this prosecution, Petitioner filed a

motion, requesting that this Court permit him to withdraw his guilty pleas. After
having conducted a two-day, pre-sentencing oral and evidentiary hearing on the
quality of the representation provided by his trial counsel, the Court rejected
Defendant's request.

In rejecting that request, this Court expressly found that his

trial counsel had not neglected to provide effective assistance of counsel. In his
Objections (Doc. #452) and Supplemental Objections (Doc. #454), the Petitioner has
not provided an explanation as to why this Court's findings in that regard were
erroneous or no longer controlling.

Given that the Court's opinion herein would not be debatable among jurists of
reason and, further, given that any appeal from this Court's decision would be
objectively frivolous, this Court denies both a certificate of appealability and any
anticipated motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis.

-2-

The captioned cause is hereby ordered terminated upon the docket records of
the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division,
at Dayton.

September 20, 2011

WALTER HERBERT RICE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies to:
Keith Dewitt, Pro Se
Counsel of record

-3-